Author
Topic: Pesticide Liability (Read 4749 times)

My bees have been nearly wiped out by pesticides spread on my property by our county 'insect control' agency.

The county agency acts like I am the one at fault. :-x Their job is to kill insects, after all...

I would like to take them to court, to sue them and prevent them from spreading poison chemicals on my property, to prevent further ecological harm to our region, and to prevent them from causing further reckless damage to my property and others.

I am really upset by the damage the county has caused, and by their reckless and callous attitude.

Have beekeepers ever successfully sued for damages caused by pesticides? What are the key points I should take into account in preparing to take a suit against the county?

I would like to take them to court, to sue them and prevent them from spreading poison chemicals on my property, to prevent further ecological harm to our region, and to prevent them from causing further reckless damage to my property and others.

yes, west nile is so much better....

you have a loss caused most likely by lack of consideration, not malice. i am guessing that if you were to call the agency doing the spraying, they'd tell you that they waited until the bees brought in for pollination were removed. it probably never occurred to them that there are backyard beekeepers. they work in an office.

if i were facing the same situation.....i would write letters to all the agencies involved, farm groups, your mayor and congressman, etc. NO EMAIL. i would be polite. explain the circumstances and your loss. ask if there is a contact list that you can be added to in the event of future spraying. ask if there is a policy for letting the public know that spraying is going to be done.

when i have lived in areas that spray, they have notified the public so that those with respiratory problems, etc. can be indoors. pet water, etc. covered.

your loss is unfortunate for you, but it would be better to make sure there is a way to keep this from happening again, than to spend time and money in court and perhaps accomplish nothing....at least in the near future.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

OK I have again contacted my local pest control agency and they have told me they have not sprayed in my area. They were helpful, and explained to me some of the processes they use to mitigate the dangers that arise when they spray over urban areas.

So I believe the damage is coming from some other source.

I have also found out that there are indeed many many precedents for bringing cases for pesticide-related damages.

To kathyp - the sweet and nice approach is fine - and I agree that it is best to start that way. But if the party is causing damage, and isn't responsive, then I would use the courts. It is not difficult, and even a losing suit will raise awareness and cause behavior change.

Anyway - my bees are still dying and I hope I can figure out the cause and stop it.

I agree with kathyp. You would have spent a large amount of time and money going to court and through the appeals process. And in the end you would probably lose unless you could show that they sprayed to much or something.

i am fairly certain that those two words have never been uttered in reference to anything about me :-)

i truly detest the impulse to sue someone at the first sign of trouble. sometimes SH, and sometimes people cause bad things and it still falls under the SH rule. going to court may be needed sometimes, but in my book it comes behind 'talk to them' and 'shoot them'.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

kathyp - I don't know what the SH rule is...imabkpr - if you want to let people walk all over you, that is fine with merandydrives - not much $$$ outlay - but it's not just about $$$

I am surprised that you are offended by my readyness to sue and don't seem to mind much that someone decimated my bees!

On another subject - I was advised by an experienced local beekeeper that the pesticide likely came from someone in the neighborhood - that you can buy powerful stuff at the garden center and it is difficult/impossible to trace. He thinks that the best long-term approach would be to lobby the legislature to only let dangerous pesticides into the hands of licensed operators.

He thinks that the best long-term approach would be to lobby the legislature to only let dangerous pesticides into the hands of licensed operators

why not? what's a little more government regulation in your life?sounds like the socialist state i know an love. that's ok. my state is not far behind.

SH=sh** happens. i fear that the board will keep me from spelling out the **, but i suspect you can figure it out.

please don't take my observations personally. as i get older, i am slipping past libertarian without a pause into anarchism. i fail to understand a world that thinks listening to bad guys is an infringement on our liberties, yet being told where you can smoke, what you can eat, what waterproofing or bug spray you can use, and cameras on every corner, is a good thing.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

I don't see the original poster polling the forum for opinions regarding advice on if legal proceedings would be necessary, appropriate, ethical, etc.,. Nor does it appear he is inquiring for opinions about one who might make use of the public court system as remedy for damages incurred. Yet it seems the thread has derailed a bit and I, although also not asked, feel compelled to defend his statements as perfectly reasonable.

To wit:

His first post, regarding a grievance with a state agency, stated: "I would like to take them to court, to sue them and prevent them from spreading poison chemicals on my property, to prevent further ecological harm to our region, and to prevent them from causing further reckless damage to my property and others." In addition to defending his property rights, I think a large group of people make donations to organizations who's mission statement is same. 8-)

Then he wrote in reply: "...the sweet and nice approach is fine - and I agree that it is best to start that way. But if the party is causing damage, and isn't responsive, then I would use the courts." Reads as though the courts would be the last resort and, even then, a large percentage of cases are settled before they go to trial.

If you're opinion is that you'd rather have toxins dumped on you & yours, take losses of personal property and leave the public (provided and paid for by you) court system as an unacceptable remedy of last resort due to your concern lest the world become overrun with "sue crazy" people, feelings towards other's problem resolution methods, political leanings, etc., I say - that's your prerogative. (but I'd keep it a secret if I were you, unless asked... would be polite, well.. even then ~> :-X.)

once again i must thank you dane for pointing our my (our) errors. what were we thinking, expressing our opinions?

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

hey, i am a bit cranky, but i had my shots today so i am not rabid :-)

i think there is wine in the ice box.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

There is a new type of mosquito control contraption at least in our state (La) that I am very much against. It consists of a type of pyrethrin in a 55gallon drum, with some sort of mister on a timer. A pest control co. sets it up and monitors it on a monthly basis. I had someone approach me with the idea and I adamently expressed my disfavor. Hope that you don't have this in your area.

I talked to another experienced beekeeper today and explained what I have seen:- the bees were very healthy and robust- suddenly they started dying at a very rapid rate- the dead bees are piling up under the hive

I explained that I didn't think the problem was a parasite - since the die-off would have ramped more slowly. He agreed.

He told me that the bees likely have been hit by a 'residual' pesticide, that stays on the flower after it has been sprayed. Mosquito control poisons apparently are not residual, and they dissapate quickly.

An example residual pesticide, he explained, is malathion, which stays toxic on the blossom for 3-4 days. There are other residual pesticides that stay active for 3-4 weeks (he didn't know the names of these types)

The residual poison doesn't kill the bee immediately. Rather, what happens is that the bee picks up the poison, carries it back to the hive, and spreads it around within the hive. Then the bees get sick and die in the hive.

This is what I am seeing.

He expects that the poison will continue working until my hive is completely dead, and that I will have to start from scratch with new bees again next year.